O., but A.: Poignant yet perverse? Dynamic but sewage infested? Exotic beauty or a frog wart the size of a bowling ball? Quixotic but contemptible diarrhea?
One can barely manage the veritable roller coaster ride of base emotions engendered by perusal of Anonymous' seedy but pointless text above; rather similar to noticing a piss soaked twenty in the bottom of a urinal...brief interest rapidly becomes abstract...as you quickly zip up and move on...

If the corporate controlled media is part of the 'thought police,' isn't it odd that roughly 85% of the American media is measurably left of center...and the left is clearly anti-corporation? Edwards made his whole stand as one of anti-corporation, Obama is not far behind in corporation bashing and the tax hikes these political delusion junkies would like to enact are obviously anti-corporation. Both of these wet behind the ears idiots got wide spread 'corporate' media coverage. So, is this corporate controlled media masochistic, or just suicidal?
Not a very logical ass-umption.
Thus, Jeremiah's meal winning propaganda spiel, appears to be one powered by his own personal delusion and clearly not a function of any recognized reality.
Perhaps the Source might consider future awards be limited to those that have at least one toe of one foot still on the ground.

So, let me see if I have this straight...You think the military recruiters fill our kids heads with lies and propaganda...so you want equal time to fill our kids heads with lies and propaganda? And this you call a balanced education? I'll withhold further comment, though I could pop an Important Gasket.
Coming from mild curiosity, how does a "peace vigil" support our troops? If we are at war, wouldn't a "war vigil" offer better, more realistic, support?
By peace vigil, do you mean forming a loose knit lump and burning some Frankincense and Muir, a vanilla scented aromatic candle or two, or do you mean stand on a street corner with a sign that states, "honk if you want peace?" Sure, people honk. We all want peace. But, imagine for a moment, if these same folks, in a rare moment of honesty, held up a sign on the same corner that stated, "I hate the freaking' military! I hate the war because it scares the living crap out of me! Honk if you think I'm accomplishing a damn thing holding up this ridiculous sign!" I wonder how many would honk...
Are those of us who think those in the peace movement really suck, big time, necessarily war fanatics? There are many of us who think Iraq was a colossal mistake, yet who have enough wisdom to comprehend that now that we are there, pulling out would be a ginormous colossal mistake. I guess being smart makes me a war fanatic.
And the reverse?

No sign of huge titanium multi-ton jet motors? Only a few parts are made of titanium and it is well documented by high speed photographic means that a 12 pound Canadian honker sucked into the intake of a jet engine causes it to come apart into pieces about the size of a grape. The internals are whirling at about 120,000 RPM. Imagine what a cement building being sucked into it at an approach speed of 550 MPH or so would do...the grapes become decimated raisin paste down to the molecular level.
Mahan, if you are so great at math, calculate the ballistic impact energy of a 750,000 lb. object going 550 MPH...don't forget to throw 8000 gallons of jet fuel into your equation.
Many private photographs exist of those planes flying into the towers. Is all that fake? Are all these common ordinary citizens part of your conspiracy? If those planes did fly into the buildings, who flew them? Most civilized Western people don't prefer to commit suicide to aid in someone else's plot. Who do we know from experience that would be willing to kill themselves in this way? Does Islam ring a dim bell in the foggy intellect, Mahan?
You seem to be suggesting that the towers came down as proclaimed, but the Pentagon alone was a conspiracy? How extraordinary that the plot to blow up the Pentagon just happened to precisely coincide with an unruly batch of Islamic a-holes taking down the towers! The mathematical probability of that is roughly 462 trillion to one.
Facts are required to convict. Where 10,000 or so facts are necessary, you have less than one. Were you a truly reasonable person, you could definately loose weight, by laughing your ass off...

Gee, what a surprise! Slick Hillie lying and cheating? What have the Clintons come to?
Anybody above the level of drooling idiot can take one look into that cold, empty, tight lipped, soulless bitch's beady little eyes and know she would personally choke the newly risen Jesus H. Christ to death with a soiled dishrag if it would get her back into the White House.
The Clinton's were scum, are scum, will remain scum.
If you just absolutely have to vote Democrat, vote for anybody on the planet but Slick Hillie.

It's always amusing to see an assortment of ignoramus like the "consortium against tire studs" found here and there on this thread, distort the available facts to fit their biased personal agenda. This is improvisation of the worst sort because it is a misleading lie and could cost somebody their life.
Any reasonable amount of research indicates overwhelming support for the use of studs if traffic safety is the issue, yet you will find these "spin doctors" falsely claiming the research indicates otherwise.
If a study lists ten facts and you lift out one fact, removing it from context, to support your individual bias, as these anti-stud nuts do, you are committing intellectual fraud.
Are these deluded "spin doctors" really that ignorant or are they just dishonest? You decide.
You may or may not like them, but if enhanced safety is the issue, the preponderance of evidence from the entire planet supports the use of studs.